The constitution is an extremely controversial document that while it may have had some adjustments and additions along the way, for the most part the document has remained true over time. The comic by Hennessey and McConnell takes a very literal take on the constitution and its meaning on the first page. The author has literal drawings and clear messages that come across in each panel. In The United States Constitution: A Graphic Adaptation, Johnathan Hennessey and Aaron McConnell use an analogous color scheme, broken panels, and literal drawings to show that the constitution needs to be viewed holistically in order to interpret the document and make any future revisions. 

The similar lighting used throughout the panels shows how the panels all blend together showing a coordinating style. Each panel has its own unique color scheme that is used only within its own panel. There is an analogous color scheme throughout all of the panels. The similar color scheme that appears in all of the panels speaks to the idea of unity and that while each panel is unique and has distinct features, each panel has a role in fitting into the larger picture. The larger picture of each panel is like a piece of the constitution. Each panel is a part of the constitution and each part works to make the one governing document. The color scheme provides evidence for the authors arguments that the constitution is to be taken as one piece and not broken into sub groups. The color of the whole piece is similar, but each panel has its own color. Even though the panels are different colors no panel stands out more than another. The lighting in each panel may be unique but no panel stands out on the page because they all follow the same color scheme. This analogous color scheme demonstrates that the interpretation of the constitution must come from looking at the constitution as a whole, rather than looking at individual pieces. 

Although each of the parts of the preamble are broken into its own piece, they all fit together to make one complete shape. The breaking of each part speaks to the idea of each part of the constitution is differentiated. The author drew each of the broken parts in a very specific shape, similar to the shape of a puzzle piece. Drawing the pieces like that of a puzzle demonstrates that each part is to be taken into consideration for the puzzle to work. One puzzle piece cannot be looked at as an individual piece separate from the other pieces around it. Each of the panels has an end but there is no distinct line drawn to clearly show the separation of each panel. The end of one panel leads right into the next one. Some of the panels even begin to cross over into the next panel. This transition goes along with the theme of unity and that all of the pieces work together to make one larger picture. In order for one to makes changes to a part of the preamble the author is saying that one must consider all of the other parts of the constitution before making any changes. The consideration of all other parts of the constitution before making any changes comes from the idea that one must look at the constitution holistically to have a clear understanding of its meaning. 

Each image in the panels is clear and takes a very literal meaning of how most citizens interpret the constitution. The preamble, while it is not fought about as publically in the media as the amendments, there is still some tension and confusion on how much government involvement there should be in relation to the preamble. The confusion and various interpretations is in direct contrast to the author’s drawings; the drawings are all very common images that are associated with the meaning of the constitution. Each of the panels are also drawn in the same style. The style of the images is very detail oriented and the main message of each panel is very clear for the reader. The images are obvious for the reader and some of the panels even have words to show the reader exactly what is going on in the panel. Each panel has a distinct and clear meaning, and it is obvious that the author is trying to show the reader a conventional interpretation of the constitution. The use of the conventional images gives the reader a clear idea of the meaning of the constitution and leaves less room for open interpretations. Having this as a comic along with the words in between the panels gives a clear message, unlike the constitution which is made up of general statements that can interpreted many different ways. The use of the literal images expresses the author’s idea that each of the parts of the constitution plays a key role in giving meaning to the document itself. The document needs to be looked at as a whole to give a clear understanding. 

The constitution has been a controversial topic over the years, and there have been many citizens who have wanted to make changes to it. The color scheme used in the panels gives a clear message of unity within the constitution. This sense of unity is also clear in the unique shapes that each panel has that all come together to make one shape. The literal drawings the author uses depicts a clear message that doesn’t leave the reader a lot of room for interpretation. These drawings are ironic because of how each citizen has their own interpretation of the same constitution. It is these images that show how vital it is for citizens to all have the same understanding of the document, or its purpose is useless. The constitution is meant to bring unity to the country and give one governing document for all citizens to abide by and the author is showing that through the lighting, shapes, and literal images in the panels. 
